Throw-in

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by rfp

After the ball was bobbled by A, couldn't A have called a time-out to save them from the eventual violation?

Ooh. Good point. I hadn't thought of that.

If the ball is rolling around, is it "in control or at the disposal of" A1, as required by 5-8-3a?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by mbyron

Ooh. Good point. I hadn't thought of that.

If the ball is rolling around, is it "in control or at the disposal of" A1, as required by 5-8-3a?

It's at the disposal, to be sure. However, the precedent of the free throw case play doesn't give A the opportunity to save the violation with a timeout. Which is odd, becuase on the freethrow RPP, they do have that opportunity.

[slow whistle]

twist...A1 intentionally sets the ball down within reach of the throw-in area say three feet away. B1 reaches through and grabs it...T on B1 right? could you have unsporting T on A1? granted B1 shouldn't take the bait, but this is obviously unusual and A1 intentionally would have done so to draw B1 into a tech.....this obviously for all of the coaches who roam this board

[Adam]

Well, I could be convinced otherwise, I suppose, with sufficient reasoning, but I can't imagine calling the T on A1 for this.

[fullor30]

Originally Posted by slow whistle

twist...A1 intentionally sets the ball down within reach of the throw-in area say three feet away. B1 reaches through and grabs it...T on B1 right? could you have unsporting T on A1? granted B1 shouldn't take the bait, but this is obviously unusual and A1 intentionally would have done so to draw B1 into a tech.....this obviously for all of the coaches who roam this board

Using that logic, in another situation, you'd have to call a T on A1 who does a basic pump fake hoping B1 fouls him.

Caveat Emptor.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by fullor30

Using that logic, in another situation, you'd have to call a T on A1 who does a basic pump fake hoping B1 fouls him.

Caveat Emptor.

Agreed, the onus is on the defender not to reach across.

[slow whistle]

You don't see an angle by the definition of unsporting foul?

"...noncontact technical foul which consists of unfair, unethical, dishonorable conduct or any behavior not in accordance with the spirit of fair play"

One could argue that play is not "in the spirit of fair play"....I believe a tech either way could be defended...

[slow whistle]

I could even think of a situation where a coach might attempt to employ this strategy...down 5 with 1 second left in the game....you aren't getting two shots off in one second obviously, but if you can draw team B into a tech then you could put two on the board with no time coming off...now you have the ball at half court, down 3 with one second left...you have a helluva a lot better chance that B1 will take the bait than you do scoring 5 pts in 1 second otherwise...now I agree that B1 should know better than to reach through, but to me an obvious attempt to draw an opponent into a technical foul should be penalized as unsporting and I believe the definition of unsporting foul allows you that latitude...

[Adam]

Sure, you could defend it if you had to; but I think it's a stretch. As fullor30 points out, you could do the same with a pump fake. You going to call a T at the start of a quarter when the offense lines up at the wrong end of the court with the hopes of luring the defense to the wrong end?

You might be able to stretch the meaning to include this play, but I would expect I'd have a very hard time justifying it to my assignors.

Just because it may be bush league doesn't mean it's a T.

[fullor30]

Originally Posted by slow whistle

You don't see an angle by the definition of unsporting foul?

"...noncontact technical foul which consists of unfair, unethical, dishonorable conduct or any behavior not in accordance with the spirit of fair play"

One could argue that play is not "in the spirit of fair play"....I believe a tech either way could be defended...

If we're partners and you decide to call a T on that one in close game with seconds to go.............I'm in the parking lot fully dressed with the engine running before you're administering.

I realize it's just forum discussion but in my eye it doesn't come remotely close to any criteria for an unsporting foul that you suggest.